Lexis Lesson · Conditions and Comparisons

01

Warm-up · 4 min

Your uncertain list

Read out the conditionals and comparisons you flagged. For each: what were you unsure about?

02

Input · 10 min

The five patterns

Collected across Lessons 1–5

Pattern	What appears	What it should be	Why it matters
Subjunctive after unless	unless the wall be under four feet	unless the wall is under four feet	PT a menos que takes subjunctive; English does not
Preposition after exceed	does not exceed to the limit	does not exceed the limit	Exceed is transitive
Reversed burden	unless a wall retains a surcharge	where a wall retains a surcharge	Exempts exactly the case that needs the rule
Missing conclusion	Stops after the numbers	…and therefore complies.	Leaves the planner to conclude, or to ask
Hedging a certainty	it should be fine for coverage	it is within the permitted coverage	Reads as doubt about a number you are sure of

Teacher note Replace any row with what you actually captured in Lessons 1–5. The last two are not grammar errors at all, and are worth naming as such — they are the ones that cost her credibility rather than marks.

03

Focus on Form · 10 min

Hedging: when it helps and when it hurts

Two kinds of uncertainty

Situation	Wrong move	Right move
You know the number	It should be around 1,200.	It is 1,209 square feet.
You do not know the rule	It is fine.	I would want to confirm how you treat artificial turf.
You know the number, not the limit	It should comply.	Proposed is 1,209. What is the coverage cap for R-1 here?
You disagree with their figure	…yes, about that.	I have 1,209 rather than 1,800 — shall I send the table?

The rule. Hedge the thing you are actually uncertain about, and be exact about everything else. Blanket hedging (should be, roughly, more or less, I think) spreads doubt over facts you have in front of you — and a planner reading that assumes the numbers are soft.

04

Controlled Practice · 16 min

Fix them

Error Correction

Each sentence carries one of the five patterns. Rewrite it.

1. Engineering is not required unless the wall be under four feet.

2. The proposed coverage does not exceed to the permitted maximum.

3. Impervious surface is reduced from 2,963 SF to 1,209 SF, so it should be fine.

4. The design shall account for surcharge unless a wall retains additional load.

5. Proposed impervious surface is around 1,200 square feet, more or less.

Teacher note Items 3 and 5 are the ones worth dwelling on: nothing is ungrammatical, and both would pass any language check. They fail professionally, not linguistically — which is exactly the distinction this unit is teaching.

Word Formation · B2+

Complete each sentence with the correct form of the word in brackets.

The proposal achieves a 59% in impervious surface. REDUCE
The revised coverage is fully with the ordinance. COMPLY
A four-foot wall requires unless it falls within the published tables. ENGINEER
Saturday hours are to the morning only. RESTRICT
The turf is treated as in some jurisdictions but not others. PERVIOUS

05

Communicative Task · 10 min

De-hedge your own writing

Task card

The baseline argument you wrote in Lesson 1

Read it back and strike every hedge that covers a fact you actually know.

Read it aloud. Hedges are much easier to hear than to see.
For each one you strike, say the exact figure instead.
Keep any hedge that covers something genuinely uncertain — and make it more specific, not less.

06

Feedback · 4 min

How many hedges?

Count them. Then answer honestly: were you hedging the numbers, or hedging your English? Those need different fixes, and only one of them is a language problem.

07

Wrap-up · 4 min

Before the next lesson

Homework. Find the actual lot-coverage or impervious-surface limit that applied to Silverwood Drive. If you cannot find it, note where you looked — next lesson the planner will ask.